Re: [TalkAntietam] South Mountain markers-Nagle's brigade

The Virtual Antietam website has a keyword searchable database of all of the Maryland Campaign tablets including Turner s Pass, Crampton s Gap, Shepherdstown

Message 1 of 19
, Sep 12, 2007

0 Attachment

The Virtual Antietam website has a keyword searchable database of all
of the Maryland Campaign tablets including Turner's Pass, Crampton's
Gap, Shepherdstown Ford, Harper's Ferry, etc. It even includes the
markers that were there at one time but are now missing. Enjoy.

To Be A Virginian, either by birth, marriage, adoption, or even
on one's mother's side, is an introduction to any state in the
Union, a passport to any foreign country, and a benediction from
the Almighty God. --Anonymous
----- Original Message -----
From: <RoteBaron@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] South Mountain markers-Nagle's
brigade

> Joe,
>
> The AoTW site has photos of the IX Corps tablets posted online.
> I hope (but cannot be sure) that the list is all inclusive.
> URL is: http://aotw.org/officers.php?unit_id=84
>
> You can also contact John Hoptak, who is an avid historian of
> General Nagle. He is a ranger at Antietam. We're both
> Schuylkill Countians, home of Nagle and the glorious 48th PA.
>
> Contact John via his blog at
> http://48thpennsylvania.blogspot.com/
>
> Any date when the new Carman book will be published?
>
> Tom Shay - (I willl arrive at Antietam on Saturday at dawn for
> the ranger tours and SHAF events),_._,___
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Harry Smeltzer

Jake, Yes, I m aware that appointment dates and dates of rank are not necessarily the same. What I should have said was, according to Eicher & Eicher, the

Message 3 of 19
, Sep 12, 2007

0 Attachment

Jake,

Yes, I'm aware that appointment dates and dates of rank are not necessarily the same. What I should have said was, according to Eicher & Eicher, the appointment date would have been the same as the date of rank. I'm assuming that the date of rank would have been included in the nomination sent to Congress.

Do you have any idea why the first nomination was not confirmed? I would imagine it probably had something to do with the fact that the nomination and backing recommendations had their genesis in McClellan's command.

Thanks for that. I've seen E & E, but I'm not sure they have the right information. It's clear from the Congressional record that 9/10 was the date he was to take rank. What's NOT clear is whether or not Lincoln APPOINTED him on 9/10 (the appointment date and the date at which an officer take rank are not necessarily the same; the latter often predates the former). To date I haven't been able to find any primary document verifying that fact.

If Lincoln DID appoint him in September 1862 (and it seems evident that he did), it wasn't premature for him to sign with the rank of a general officer. In the absence of a Congress, the appointment acts (and Richard Sommers at Carlise confirmed this for me) much like a recess appointment would today.

Sometime between Sept. 10 and Sept. 20, word got to Nagle that he had been appointed a general officer (and from a source of credible enough authority that Sturgis took to referring to him as "Colonel (now General)" by Sept. 22.

What I'm trying to find out (if the paper trail still exists) is WHERE and WHEN Nagle got that info in September 1862.

Nagle's first BG USV commission expired without confirmation on 4/3/1863.
He was not nominated until 12/23/1862: had he been confirmed, his date of
rank would have been the same as his appointment date, 9/10/1862. He was
nominated again on 3/10/1863, and confirmed 3/13/1863. Appointment date was
3/23/1863 to date from 3/13/1863.

Thanks, Tom. I didn't THINK there were any at Fox's, and the only ones I
recall at Turner's were a few VERY general ones along the National Pike,
across from the Mountain House.

I'm at the NA right now digging through Nagle's CMSR and the Commissions
Branch files trying to pin down the date on which he was actually appointed
BG.

The commission was TO RANK Sept. 10, 1862, but it could have been issued
anytime between then and Sept. 20 (the date on which he starts signing his
reports "Brigadier General"). The 48th PA's monument says he received the
commision on the 17th, but if there's one thing I've learned in my study of
the Civil War, it's never to trust anything chisled into stone. :)

The earliest mention of the appointment in the Congressional record is a
letter from Lincoln submitting it to Congress on December 23, 1862 (but if
that letter represents the actual appointment, then Nagle was either very
psychic or very presumptuous) . That date must be when Lincoln finally got
around to submitting the appointment to Congress (it had been out of session
from July 18 to Nov. 30, 1862).

__________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Joseph Pierro

Harry: As it happened, the issue doesn t appear to have been anything particular to Nagle. (If it had, I suspect they would have just voted him down.) They

Message 4 of 19
, Sep 13, 2007

0 Attachment

Harry:

As it happened, the issue doesn't appear to have been anything particular to Nagle. (If it had, I suspect they would have just voted him down.) They turned an entire sheaf of promotions, without voting on any of them, back to Lincoln on proceedural grounds.

The record reads as follows:

"The Senate proceeded to consider the following report:

"'The Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia, to whom were referred the nominations of the several major-generals and brigadier-generals and hospital chaplains appointed since the last session of Congress, find no law authorizing said appointments, and recommend that the nominations be returned to the President; and

"'Resolved, That the Senate agree to the said report.'" (Senate Exec. Journal, 37th Cong., 3d sess., February 12, 1863, 128)

The nomination that went to Congress does indeed bear a date of rank (Sept. 10, 1862), but the communication itself, as I mentioned before, is dated December.

The available evidence is clear that Nagle had learned of his appointment (and hence was entitled to call himself a brigadier general) before the campaign ended. It is most likely, but not 100% certain, that he found out prior to going into action on Sept. 17.

Where the issue gets a bit cloudy, and hence why it would be of interest to know the date on which something was transmitted from Washington with the news that he had been appointed by the preisdent, concerns South Mountain.

In the narrative portion of Carman's manuscript, he never mentions Nagle by rank. (It's always, "Nagle's brigade," and the like.) Only in his Table of Organization does he give a rank, listing him as "Colonel." On the War Dept. tablet on the battlefield, however, Nagle is listed as a brigadier general, suggesting that Carman altered his views regarding Nagle's status on the 17th.

It is possible, however, that Nagle should be properly be designated as a colonel at South Mountain. Even if Lincoln did issue the commission on the same day that Nagle was to take rank (Sept. 10), the only available evidence to come to light thus far (the report of his division commander, Samuel Sturgis) suggests that word of the promotion had not yet reached the army prior to the fighting at Fox's Gap.

This would correspond to the manner in which the editors of the OR saw the issue. On their compiled list of casualties at South Mountain, Nagle appears as a colonel (v. 19, pt. 1, p. 186), while on the similar list for Antietam (v. 19, pt. 1, p. 197) he's listed as a brigadier general.

Yes, I'm aware that appointment dates and dates of rank are not necessarily the same. What I should have said was, according to Eicher & Eicher, the appointment date would have been the same as the date of rank. I'm assuming that the date of rank would have been included in the nomination sent to Congress.

Do you have any idea why the first nomination was not confirmed? I would imagine it probably had something to do with the fact that the nomination and backing recommendations had their genesis in McClellan's command.

Thanks for that. I've seen E & E, but I'm not sure they have the right information. It's clear from the Congressional record that 9/10 was the date he was to take rank. What's NOT clear is whether or not Lincoln APPOINTED him on 9/10 (the appointment date and the date at which an officer take rank are not necessarily the same; the latter often predates the former). To date I haven't been able to find any primary document verifying that fact.

If Lincoln DID appoint him in September 1862 (and it seems evident that he did), it wasn't premature for him to sign with the rank of a general officer. In the absence of a Congress, the appointment acts (and Richard Sommers at Carlise confirmed this for me) much like a recess appointment would today.

Sometime between Sept. 10 and Sept. 20, word got to Nagle that he had been appointed a general officer (and from a source of credible enough authority that Sturgis took to referring to him as "Colonel (now General)" by Sept. 22.

What I'm trying to find out (if the paper trail still exists) is WHERE and WHEN Nagle got that info in September 1862.

Nagle's first BG USV commission expired without confirmation on 4/3/1863.
He was not nominated until 12/23/1862: had he been confirmed, his date of
rank would have been the same as his appointment date, 9/10/1862. He was
nominated again on 3/10/1863, and confirmed 3/13/1863. Appointment date was
3/23/1863 to date from 3/13/1863.

Thanks, Tom. I didn't THINK there were any at Fox's, and the only ones I
recall at Turner's were a few VERY general ones along the National Pike,
across from the Mountain House.

I'm at the NA right now digging through Nagle's CMSR and the Commissions
Branch files trying to pin down the date on which he was actually appointed
BG.

The commission was TO RANK Sept. 10, 1862, but it could have been issued
anytime between then and Sept. 20 (the date on which he starts signing his
reports "Brigadier General"). The 48th PA's monument says he received the
commision on the 17th, but if there's one thing I've learned in my study of
the Civil War, it's never to trust anything chisled into stone. :)

The earliest mention of the appointment in the Congressional record is a
letter from Lincoln submitting it to Congress on December 23, 1862 (but if
that letter represents the actual appointment, then Nagle was either very
psychic or very presumptuous) . That date must be when Lincoln finally got
around to submitting the appointment to Congress (it had been out of session
from July 18 to Nov. 30, 1862).

The Virtual Antietam website has a keyword searchable database of all
of the Maryland Campaign tablets including Turner's Pass, Crampton's
Gap, Shepherdstown Ford, Harper's Ferry, etc. It even includes the
markers that were there at one time but are now missing. Enjoy.

> Does anyone happen to know if there's one of those Carman-era iron
> markers at Fox's Gap that covers Nagle's brigade in particular?
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more!http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Brian Downey

Hi Jake, For the record, Stephen had all the monuments and tablets online on Virtual Antietam long before I had any on AotW. Also, mine aren t actually tablet

Message 6 of 19
, Sep 13, 2007

0 Attachment

Hi Jake,

For the record, Stephen had all the monuments and tablets online on
Virtual Antietam long before I had any on AotW. Also, mine aren't
actually tablet images, though Stephen's are. Mine are text --
formatted to look like tablets -- so the content is Google-searchable
and I have tablets with text for those long lost from the actual
battlefield (based on Carman/Heth's notes from the Archives). AotW
versions are also linked to maps and military units mentioned for
cross reference.

>
> Thanks Steve! I knew of the full set of tablet images from Antietam

battlefiled on the AOTW site, but didn't realize someone had captured
the remaining ones from outside of the park boundary.

Brian Downey

Hello Talk friends, I ll be at Sharpsburg and the Battlefield all day on Saturday. Alert the media :) Haven t set schedule, but will try to cram in as much as

Message 7 of 19
, Sep 13, 2007

0 Attachment

Hello Talk friends,

I'll be at Sharpsburg and the Battlefield all day on Saturday. Alert
the media :) Haven't set schedule, but will try to cram in as much as
possible. I'll prob wear an AotW tee shirt - please give me an elbow
poke if I don't see you first. If you put your email address on your
forehead, I'll probably recognize that since I don't know many by face
....

For the record, Stephen had all the monuments and tablets online on
Virtual Antietam long before I had any on AotW. Also, mine aren't
actually tablet images, though Stephen's are. Mine are text --
formatted to look like tablets -- so the content is Google-searchable
and I have tablets with text for those long lost from the actual
battlefield (based on Carman/Heth' s notes from the Archives). AotW
versions are also linked to maps and military units mentioned for
cross reference.

>
> Thanks Steve! I knew of the full set of tablet images from Antietam

battlefiled on the AOTW site, but didn't realize someone had captured
the remaining ones from outside of the park boundary.

____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.http://farechase.yahoo.com/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Stephen Recker

Brian, No, YOU da man. Actually I do appreciate the kind words. Another thought about the differences in the two databases. Virtual Antietam is a simple

Message 9 of 19
, Sep 13, 2007

0 Attachment

Brian,

No, YOU da man.

Actually I do appreciate the kind words. Another thought about the
differences in the two databases. Virtual Antietam is a simple keyword
search of the text of the markers and monuments. You gotta know what
you are looking for, because if you keyword search for "Maryland" and
the marker says, MD, you are out of luck. AotW, on the other hand, is
an actual relational database that will parse out specific narrow
searches.

So if I am at a book show and I need to find out if the 16th Alaska
Dogsled Team was at Antietam, I fire up AotW and it finds it for me. If
I want to see what the area behind the marker looks like I use Virtual
Antietam.

I didn't find the data for the 'lost markers' at the archives. I got a
folder from Jane Custer that has pictures of every marker on the field.
She has photos of a few markers that are gone, an example being the one
that used to be on the house near Middle Bridge.

In some of my the postcards and battlefield photos I have seen missing
markers and markers that have been moved. There is a great Burgan
postcard that shows the three markers for Sedgwick's brigades placed
just north of the 15th MA monument. They are now south of it down the
hill. I also have a photos of an old marker that used to be in front of
Old Simon. It looks like it is the congressional act creating the
cemetery. There is no marker there now. And there used to be a marker
just south west of the NJ monument.

Stephen

On Thursday, September 13, 2007, at 09:53 AM, Brian Downey wrote:

> For the record, Stephen had all the monuments and tablets online on
> Virtual Antietam long before I had any on AotW. Also, mine aren't
> actually tablet images, though Stephen's are. Mine are text --
> formatted to look like tablets -- so the content is Google-searchable
> and I have tablets with text for those long lost from the actual
> battlefield (based on Carman/Heth's notes from the Archives). AotW
> versions are also linked to maps and military units mentioned for
> cross reference.
>
> You want to look at what's actually on the field? Go see Stephen.
>

G E Mayers

Dear Tom, Ok. Just wondering....something for the future! BTW, contact me privately about speaking at the Bucks County CWRT next year ...sometime? Yr. Obt.

Message 10 of 19
, Feb 12, 2008

0 Attachment

Dear Tom,

Ok. Just wondering....something for the future!

BTW, contact me privately about speaking at the Bucks County CWRT
next year ...sometime?

Yr. Obt. Svt.
G E "Gerry" Mayers

To Be A Virginian, either by birth, marriage, adoption, or even
on one's mother's side, is an introduction to any state in the
Union, a passport to any foreign country, and a benediction from
the Almighty God. --Anonymous